Handheld robotic needle holder training: slower but better
- 8 June 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Surgical Endoscopy
- Vol. 35 (4), 1667-1674
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07550-3
Abstract
Background Handheld robotic laparoscopic instruments fill the gap between robotic and conventional instruments, combining the advantages of degrees of freedom and low price. The difficulty and value in learning these new instruments require detailed investigation. Methods Forty novice surgeons with no laparoscopic experience were randomly assigned to two groups: conventional instrument group (Group Conv) and robotic instrument group (Group Rob). The same training protocol was used in both groups: after viewing a standard operation film, laparoscopic suture training was administered using the corresponding instruments. After each training period, surgeons were tested using a force-sensing test platform. Maximum force (MF) and impulse (IMP) of operators through each ring were recorded. Learning curves based on MF and IMP for both instruments were compared. Institutional review board approval is not needed for this study. Results MF and IMP of both groups decreased with increased training time; the learning curve of Group Conv decreased faster than that of Group Rob. When training time reached 13 h, the MF of Group Rob was significantly lower than that of Group Conv (P < 0.05), while IMP showed no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusions Effective training reduces operator MF and IMP, possibly decreasing damage to tissues with both conventional and handheld robotic needle holders. Group Rob took longer to reach a plateau, but subsequently had lower suture tension than did Group Conv. MF is more sensitive than IMP for measuring performance progress.Keywords
Funding Information
- youth talent project of the Health Commission of Hubei Province (Grant No. WJ2019Q050)
- Hubei Provincial Teaching Reform Research Project (Grant No. 2018038)
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Handheld laparoscopic robotized instrument: progress or challenge?Surgical Endoscopy, 2019
- Structured cost analysis of robotic TME resection for rectal cancer: a comparison between the da Vinci Si and Xi in a single surgeon’s experienceSurgical Endoscopy, 2018
- Initial experience using a robotic-driven laparoscopic needle holder with ergonomic handle: assessment of surgeons’ task performance and ergonomicsInternational Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, 2017
- Evaluation of the effect of a laparoscopic robotized needle holder on ergonomics and skillsSurgical Endoscopy, 2015
- The efficacy of robotic driven handheld instruments for the acquisition of basic laparoscopic suturing skillsEuropean Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 2015
- Cost Analysis of Pediatric Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic PyeloplastyJournal of Urology, 2013
- History of robotic surgeryJournal of Robotic Surgery, 2010
- A history of robots: from science fiction to surgical roboticsJournal of Robotic Surgery, 2007
- Robotics in surgeryJournal of the American College of Surgeons, 2003
- What’s new in urologyJournal of the American College of Surgeons, 2002